McDonald's 'Obesity' Lawsuit Back in Court

NewsMax.com ^ | Jan. 26, 2005 | NewsMax Wires

[FairfaxVA]

It's ridiculous that this case is back again.

[pabianice]

Where's the class action law suit demanding compensation from lawyers for making the rest of us crazy?

[since1868]

I think Greta VanSusteren's husband behind this.

[MisterKnowItAll]

If anyone would like to read the appellate court's decision, you can download it here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/viewcase.pl?court=0&subject=0&casenum=&party=mcdonald%27s&date1=&date3=&date2=&search=Search

To go directly to the .pdf file, you can use the following link (the decision is six pages long):

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/039010p.pdf

[xJones]

Unbelievable. Nobody forced those kids to eat at Mickie D's. It was their FAMILY that paid for all their meals, that's where any blame lies. And the family could have noticed that their little dumplings were turning into huge dumplings, and bought salads instead of double-cheese burgers, fries and fatty deserts.

Some trial lawyers just want to earn the big-time bucks like the tobacco lawyers did.

[Spok]

``it is not the place of the law to protect them from their own excesses.''

D'ya think?

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

I'm thinking of suing the Dillard's shoe department....... I can't control myself in there.......... it can't be my fault!

[xsmommy]

serving papers on Talbots this afternoon then, if this is a cause of action then i have grounds!

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

OH, let me know that that Talbot's lawsuit goes........ that would be one for the "pending" file........ ;^)

Williams Sonoma should be a good one as well.

[kingattax]

Krispy Kreme is next

[get'emall]

I think I can build a case against FreeRepublic. I spend countless hours of a limited lifespan on this site that I can never recover.

I could have spent that precious time writing a novel, building an ark or eating at McDonald's for profit. This is all Jim Robinson's fault and I demand compensation.

[Sender]

Yes it is ridiculous. The plaintiffs should pay ALL court costs and legal expenses for this joke. I am a weight-challenged American, and I take full responsibility for my excess. I don't blame McDonalds or Zaxby's or Garfield for introducing me to lasagna.

[Imaverygooddriver]

I bring my children to McDonalds every single day for breakfast, lunch and dinner and look how chubby the little fellows are getting! This is an outrage! I require compensation.

[Born to Conserve]

I know exactly how bad McDonald's is for me, and I like it.

The one thing that pisses me off is the way they bundle fries into the meal items. I don't usually want fries, but if you buy a sandwich and a soda, you pay just as much as the meal.

I've seen ads for Wendy's saying you can substitute other things for the fries -- salads, chili, etc. I'm going there next time I feel the need for fast food.

[Imaverygooddriver]

"I want everything on the menu, put it in a bucket with eggs on top."

 

[Poohbah]

"You gonna eat those fries?"

[MisterKnowItAll]

Actually the part of the case that's 'back' has to do only with the deceptive advertising claim. The appellate court says the trial judge incorrectly dismissed an amended complaint.

According to the appellate court, that claim, under New York General Business Law section 349 (the New York Consumer Protection Act), doesn't require a showing that the plaintiffs actually relied on the deceptive advertising. Under this law, a court could find that McDonald's engaged in deceptive trade practices even if nobody actually believed them.

And the trial court got that part right. The appellate court is remanding the case merely because the trial court dismissed that part of the claim for the wrong reason (on the mistaken grounds that certain facts had to be alleged in the complaint rather than brought out during discovery). There's no reason to think McDonald's will lose on remand either, and of course all the other stuff that was dismissed stays dismissed.

At any rate, nothing about this remand suggests that Talbot's, Dillard's, or Krispy Kreme can be held responsible for the self-destructive behavior of its customers -- though of course they might get into trouble under the consumer-protection laws of their respective states if they engaged in deceptive advertising.

[myrabach]

I am going to sue my grocery store for offering all the food that is making me fat. I can go and buy whatever I want and how much I want.

This is an outrage... how can they let me buy so much food? How can they let me buy the wrong kind of food? I have a weight problem fur cryin' out loud.

And get this, I can actually leave one grocery store and go to another to buy even more food! How can that happen here in America?

I can then even go to a restaurant and order ANYTHING off the menu! I can order as much of anything that I want! Is this what our troops fought for? The freedom to eat what I want when I want? That is so perverted. I can go on a feeding frenzy and no one, mind you, no one is there to stop me. Who is responsible for this outrage?

I want a microchip inserted into my brain that will go off whenever I eat anything that is remotely fattening. I want an alarm to go off whenever I attempt to purchase a restricted food. I want lights to flash if I attempt to purchase more than my allotted share of food, no matter how healthy it appears to be.

I want my car to take me directly home if I try to shop another food store. I want someone to deny me entry into a restaurant if I've just finished shopping. And I want a controlled menu whenever I decide to order.

I am not responsible for my own self. I cannot make good food choices, only bad choices. I need the government or a bunch of lawyers to decided for me.

[since1868]

Kids are fat because they are playing too much PS2 and not enough 2 hand touch!!

[GreenEggsNHam]

ping!